Announcing connect.dpreview.com

Today we're proud to announce the launch of connect.dpreview.com, a mobile, social and connected photography site from dpreview.com. Mobile photography and the ability to share images across social networks have helped foster a vibrant and creative new genre of photographic arts - one that is having a profound effect on the way we all shoot, share, discover and enjoy photography. Connect will explore, explain and embrace the social, mobile, app-driven, connected side of contemporary photography. Welcome.

We never imagined it would be easy for DPReview to acommodate the growing importance of the smart phone camera in the world of photography.

We, like most of you, are enthusiastic photographers, and also like most of you, we like to think that what sets us apart from casual snapshooters is that we are real photographers. Creative photographers. But we're wrong. Just like all of those photographers ten years ago that told us that real, creative photographers only use film were wrong. You may or may not be a fan of Instagram or Facebook or the glorification of the snapshot (and reading the forums as I do, it's obvious many of you don't), and that's totally OK. You might hate Instagram filters (though you have to know Instagram isn't about the filters, it's about the community). What you can't deny, however, is the powerful effect that this new generation of 24/7 photographers and sharers is having on our industry.

Back in 1997 when I was launching What Digital Camera magazine and a year later when Phil unleashed dpreview.com there were plenty in the photographic industry that simply refused to believe digital would ever be anything more than a niche for business users and computer hobbyists. And to a certain extent our industry got it even more wrong this time, underestimating the speed with which the cellphone would replace the compact camera in the mass market. Even two years ago I was regularly being told that smart phones simply weren't a threat because they didn't have zoom lenses or ISO control or a real flash, completely ignoring the fact that most of their target market just wanted something 'good enough' to take pictures to share on Facebook. Or the fact that the cameras on phones might actually get better than 'good enough'.

The good news is that camera manufacturers are waking up to the opportunity, embracing the growth in social photography by designing compacts that offer all the convenience and connectivity of a phone, but with the quality and photographic features of a 'real' camera. The Nikon Coolpix S800C and the Samsung Galaxy camera, which both run the Android operating system, are likely to be just the beginning.

And we at dpreview.com need and want to be talking about what's happening in our industry. We're excited that the world of photography is experiencing an explosion of creativity and engagement that hasn't been seen since the first consumer digital cameras arrived almost two decades ago.

So, even if you've yet to take a mobile photo, we urge you to visit connect.dpreview.com to find out about the latest developments in connected cameras, apps, camera phones and the community and creativity that is growing up around them. You'll find the first two full in-depth reviews of camera phones, and I think you'll be pleased to discover that we've not forgotton what makes dpreview.com so unique; we won't be skimping on the technical side of our reviewing process. As well as an entirely new test scene for the comparison widget (which will be shared with conventional cameras in future) we've teamed up with the imaging scientists at DxO Labs to include a full suite of measured, objective tests .

What we're launching today is only the first step, and we have some really, really cool stuff to add in the coming months.

Simon Joinson, Editor-in-chief, dpreview.com

Footnote:

I would like to make clear that dpreview is not going to change as a result of this launch. By making connect a separate site, we're able to embrace the exciting world of mobile photography without having an impact on dpreview. Connect does not come at expense of the news, previews and reviews that have always been the core of the site. Success in projects like this (and the others that will follow in 2013) allows us to invest more resource into dpreview in the future.

Comments

Ugh. Somehow I'd managed to miss this "connection" until today, when I clicked on the Samsung Galaxy camera review.

It's like some garish trip back in time, and to a world of indistinguishable Engadget/Gizmodo/Gawker sites. Just awful, and terribly confusing with regard to its relationship with "the" DPReview. I hope the parallel launch of Connect isn't some stealth migration strategy to move away from DPReview.com.

Build on what you have, which is what people love you for, rather than imitating something that other people love for other reasons.

Why doesn't dpreview try connecting with real photography news and reviews instead of more gadget and video news/reviews! Today Canon and Sony have announced major firmware updates for the 1Dx and NEX 7, and the only news stories we get are about the a time lapse of the Space Shuttle, and a GoPro camera!

On one side it is sad dpreview loose its primary focus, on another it opens opportunity for someone else to build a new purely photography oriented site without all the gadget fluff that is so omnipresent on the interenet.

It is slippery slope, first phones, tabs and apps and soon you start see reviews for covers, pouches and "cool" stuff like lens attachments and mini tripods...

There is a limit how much you can keep beating around the "connected" photography with original articles which hans't already been done ad nauseam by engadget and other gadget sites.

Nice site, btw, and a great idea. Don't listen to the naysayers. Except maybe in one respect: how about splitting the RSS feed into three - dpreview only, connect only, and dpreview+connect? That should keep everyone happy.

Out of morbid curiosity, I went over and took a look at the tablet 'article' on connect. I saw a short rundown there that was thin on substance, and of course, apple taking home the highest ratings from dpreview, which was no surprise. I closed what would be the last tab of dpreview 'connect' I ever open up on my browser. Please stick to covering cameras ... It is not too late to fix this morass that you have been mophing into. We can do this togther, just take small steps! Step one: We need to try to go one entire month without mentioning apple, facebook or instagram on this front page. We can do it, I have faith in you, dpreview!

Ok Simon, I just did, spent a good bit of time on the new site. I apologize for being so harsh, rash and brash (and immature and rude at times to boot, gulp). I should not be so impusive to post the first thing on my mind like that without even really thinking it through oftentimes. Ok, my impressions thus far: I like how much you have added to the Nokia 808 Pureview's Review by Mr. Britton. Admittedly it makes me want one (in theory), and it is striking to see just how superior it is to any other leading smartphone camera. Though, I was a bit dismayed to see how few cons were listed for the Iphone 5 in comparison to the Nokia, considering how highly it rated. I took a peek at the waterproof casese review, but immediately got revolted by the nauseous seas of filter effects contained therein and had to flee the scene to maintain some sanity. --->

---> I found Mr. Butler's 'smart cameras' article to be very interesting, well done morsel, but it leaves one wanting more, though. Good little chart overview of some of what these bleeding edge cameras can and can't do. Feel free to add in as many of these comparison charts as you like! I miss those super thorough charts like the ones you did for the 8mp Sony sensor enthusiast prosumer cams of the 04/05 era. I am sure that I am not alone in saying that a Samsung EX2 review would be MOST welcomed! Or perhaps an enthusiast group test, even better. I am very intrigued to learn more about how this live view app works, the remote viewfinder feature. It is not in my near future, but perhaps not-too-distant future. Let's just say that I am doing my homework early ... I like to see ALL of what's out there before I buy :PSorry again for the harsh words. I guess I WILL be sneaking a peek now and again into this strange new world of camera/phone hybrids, to at the very least shed my ignorance!

Wow, your apology was very refreshing. Well done! DPR made the decision to separate mobile photography. Right now they obviously want to give it plenty of attention and drive traffic there. Maybe later the mobile stuff will get less of a mention on this site.

I agree. The feeds are also showing how focused is DPReview on the smartphone compact with 5 articles on that category and not one on the other. Separating the feeds at least will not give me the impression that dpreview is shifting away.

Why separating instead of merging? Isn't a DSLR with GPS+WIFI "mobile" for all intents and purposes? Shouldn't the new Canon 6D belong to "connect.dpreview.com"? Where is the you are drawing the line? Don't tell me size, because an iPad is much bigger than a DSLR.

There're a lot of people on DPR who simply don't want to see posts about things like the iPhone, Nokia 808, Android-based cameras, etc. This is apparent because they make it known whenever the staff dare post news about such products, so I guess the line is being drawn pretty much there. ;)

DP, congrats on the new website "Connect". There seems to be a collision of cameras and cellphones that is eminent in the months ahead. I find it interesting that DP has the foresight to understand it is not really a collision. It is a whole to genre of interest in photography. I have been pondering the war between cameras and smartphones and wondering whether it will be Apple/Nokia who will win or will it be Canon/Nikon. If DP has guessed right, both sides will win. There is room for both. What may find its way to obsolescence could be the compact point and shoot cameras....those that are finding homes in the pockets and purses in the form of smart phones. My daughter is an avid iPhone "photographer" and has posted some remarkable images. She is your target market and there are many like her. I for one, will enjoy both your D Preview site and your Connect site.

A compliment about reliability of posting:I am posting from china where my connection is interrupted frequently. If after posting my browser does not show the post, it was not posted. If it does show the post, it was posted. This seems to be trivial, but e.g. in facebook posts are always shown after posting, even if they never made it. Thus kudos to you for programming a better posting system than facebook. It is a tiny feature, but important to users who must use unreliable internet services! Thanks so much!

Personally, I think that mobile photography is actually as different a form of photography from enthusiast/professional photography as video is to photos. You don't see a lot of discussion about videography on this site because it requires a different set of skills and a different attitude towards the subject. The same applies to mobile photography. Mobile photography is about getting a good to great photos while on the go with the least amount of equipment. It's not just about camera phones, but that is definitely part of it. I am beginning to embrace this attitude as part of my travel photography.

I have a DSLR (40D) with heavy lenses. I also have a S95 and a 13" HP laptop that I used to backup photos, etc.

For my recent Italy cruise, I took the S95 for primary quality photos (Lensmate adapters with UV and Circular Polarizer, RAW+JPG), bought a Sony HX30 for 20x zoom and HD video (produced some of the best HD video that I have seen), and bought a ASUS Infinity TF700 tablet (9hr battery life) for photo backup and Internet access. My travel backpack ended up being 10lbs to 15lbs lighter without the DSLR and the laptop + spare batteries.

There were a couple of times where I wished I had the DSLR with me, primarily in low light situations (interior of churches and night shots when coming into Venice), but with manual settings on the S95 I was still able to get good photos in these situations.

What surprised me during the trip was that the majority of tourists with DSLR cameras were young women and mothers. Most guys had Canon G-Series type cameras. There was one woman retiree running around taking all of her pictures using her iPad, which I thought was both amusing and interesting.

The Specs fail to include connectivity (hdmi, usb, plugin storage upgrade type and max capacity). These things need to be spelled out clearly including for example if hdmi port is standard or micro etc.

It is not difficult to collect this information -although in rare cases, sometimes manufacturers web sites, may to some extent hide this information. However, any reviewer who actually has hands on access simply needs to look at the product. Is the reader supposed to run around and waste time to collect this information?

I'm afraid this is the kind of inexcusable oversight that you see in the typical advertisements or specs on "know very little" print and web ads and catalogue pages.

Anyone who would like to upgrade storage, or would like to connect an dSLR or some other camera needs to know this information.

I would therefore downgrade these reviews, regardless of the rest of the review quality and thoroughness.

Feature Request for a delete button:I accidentally posted the same post several times. How do I delete them to not bother others with this clutter. ( If can not, can you be so kind in deleting my multiple posts, sorry for the inconvenience )

The new site is great. I love how it just appeared out of nowhere. How often does that happen? Funny how the community can be given a whole new site, and all some people are able to see is that something has been taken from them. Those that see that something has been taken seem a bit self centered to me, as it seems they are not interested in seeing dpreview cater to the community as a whole, or in expanding their community. I don't think I've ever seen so many self centered ego's flying around as I have at dpreview, not even on high IQ forums. Certainly makes it one of the most interesting places I've found, however. So good show, as they say. lol

People are people. The mostly-stupid discourse we see in this very comments section won't occur at the new site, of course, but it will be replaced by equally stupid discourse on other topics. The Apple people will say you can't do anything on Android. The Android people will say you can't do anything on IPhone, and that Apple people all hide pictures of Steve Jobs in their underwear. The guys using Android cameras will be snobs about how much better their IQ is, much like the DSLR/Mirrorless crowd here looks down on camera phones. Again, people are people, and they like to bicker.

It won't be perfect but I'll take it. I'm happy the new site exists, and I'm happy they're splitting mobile/connected photography out of the main site. For me, the best part is that, over there, I presumably won't have to read a bunch of old fuddy duddies being fuddy duddies while writing that it's nothing about being a fuddy duddy.

And for us enthusiasts who strive to take GREAT photos (even if we miss a lot), presumably it means we won't have to read still more drivel about how "the tool doesn't matter" (which always begs the question, why then don't Nikon & Canon just fold up their tents & exit the DSLR business altogether?) or how it's nothing but dried-up, washed-up, pent-up, stuck-up snobs who don't embrace mobile photography and worship it like it's the second coming of Jesus or something. They can continue to live in the allusion that they're "photographers" while we here can get back to talking about ACTUAL photography for once.

What is "real photography"? An attempt at definition:1) Create a harmonious portfolio with artistic vision and expression that is a joy to view2) Publish your portfolio3) Use the feedback from your viewers to improve your (real) photography

Enoy the Portfolio of Henri Cartier Bresson:http://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=CMS3&VF=MAGO31_10_VForm&ERID=24KL53ZMYNHe is regarded as father of modern Photojournalism and the Street Photography Genre.

Notes:1) Henri Cartier Bresson used a Leica M camera for his photography. At his time this was considered a toy camera not suitable for "real photography"2) brooklyntherory used a Cellphone Camera. At his time this was considered a toy camera not suitable for "real photography"

What? Cell phone photography? That's not real photography. I've had the latest top of the line smart phones for years and taken next to zero pictures with it and zero videos with it. The few I did take were worthless. dpreview should be for avid amatures, semi pros. and pros. using high quaility cameras. Also the mid-range and lower end stuff (point and Shots) should be reviewed so we can make informed decisions on backup cameras. I having real trouble understanding how a bunch of semi-crappy photos (blurry, underexposed) of the people across the table at the dinner making silly faces or a pic. of your expensive cup of coffee from the coffee house is going to have any real value. Pull the plug and focus on good quility cameras and good quaility photos. I like this site the way it is.

You're entitled to an opinion, but it's never a good idea to tunnel vision yourself with such an extreme view. Your argument is just a few steps away from 'Only DSLRs can take photos; DCs are worthless'. Gear takes a backseat to vision. I shot a sunset photo with my phone on a recent trip to Easter Island that I'm more than happy with. It's the man, not the machine, that makes a great photo.

And (Simon Joinson) you have my full support on this. I would say your tapping into this market is akin to how Nikon tapped into the point & shoot market years ago with its auto-do everything 35mm point & shoot cameras (Nikon "One Touch" I think it was) even though models like the Nikon F3 & their Nikkor lenses were still what they were mostly known for--and they continued to do well with it. I have certainly been one of the most vocal about not embracing mobile photography & maintaining a line separating us enthusiasts from the snapshooters, but I know you wouldn't have "spun off" the connect site based solely on little old me. There are plenty of others who feel much the same way, and I am delighted you listened to us. I cannot tell you enough how much better I feel about DPreview when I see that you're listening to us enthusiasts.

One thing the internet fosters is armchair everything. Take whatever hobby tou can think of, find a forum about it and I can guarantee that there will be people that claim they are professionals eventhough they really just got started, there will be people debating the intrcate technical details of the craft without ever producing anything and there will bepeople who much prefer talking about the subject on the forum to actually doing it. Foes for anything.

What's sad about it is that when someone genuinely asks a question on a form the answers will predominantly be given by one of these forum pros and not from someone actually skilled in the craft under discussion.

The snobbery of the "real" photographers using "real" cameras is astounding. The best camera is the one that you have with you, ever heard that phrase before? I've been shooting a photo a day for 6 weeks, many times when the other 3 "real" cameras are at home. The iPhone forces me to look at subjects differently so I welcome this refreshing direction that dept has taken (this post typed on my Canon 5D Mk 2).

And the attitude of the others is astounding as well. Some "snobbery" is GOOD, it means we have STANDARDS. If we extrapolate your line of thinking to, say, the culinary arts, then the culinary artists are "snobs" for RIGHTLY dismissing Hot Pockets heated in the microwave as being beneath what they aspire to.

Enough of this "best camera is what you have with you" horse manure. Get real. A Sony RX-100 or, even better, an Olympus PEN with a Panasonic 20mm 1.7 is way smaller than even smaller DSLRs like the Canon Rebels, & produces MUCH better image quality than any stinking iPhone ever could. Gee whiz, you people act like carrying a camera with you is like backpacking for a week-long mule-ride through the Grand Canyon. My goodness.

Like I said, if this new site means that this site can now focus almost exclusively on REAL cameras for REAL photographers, I couldn't be happier. Let the soccer moms & hipsters flock to connect.dpreview.com so we can get back to REAL photography in here.

larry, you have misconstrued your own culinary analogy. The photograph would equate with the creative output, hence the food. The camera would equate with the equipment, hence the cookware and stove. And the photographer of course equates with the creative talent, hence the culinary artist.

So to run your analogy, you are saying a top chef could not create excellent food except by using fancy Le Creuset cookware in a top-of-the-line Aga stove. Whereas we all know the opposite to be true - a decent chef could turn out mouthwatering food on a beach barbeque.

I think you keep mistaking image quality with a quality image, if you can forgive me mangling the language.

The other big problem with the culinary analogy is that even the world's greatest chefs love street food. They might even eat both street food and gourmet on the same day.

This either/or attitude that polarizes modern discourse is what's really ruining things. Is it inconceivable that professional photographers with $20,000 of gear around their neck also shoot with their smartphones? Because that is a fact.

I think larrytusaz makes some good points, eve though your point is well taken.

Ever talk to real chefs? You could not take their "tools" away from them without a fight. They have their favorite knives, pots and pans, blenders, etc.

The rational view is that both GOOD EQUIPMENTt and TALENT are necessary. You don't need the world's newest and fanciest equipment if you have talent, but some achievements will be out of reach with inadequate, crappy tools, just as without real talent the world's best tools will not help the un-talented create anything really worth discussing.

You are right of course, and I mean no disrespect to larrytusaz either. Who would not prefer to have the best tool for the job always to hand (preferably with someone else to carry the bags), and who does not take pleasure in using such tools? And I would be fibbing if I did not confess to some 'gadget lust' as well - taking pleasure in the kit more-or-less for its own sake.

But ultimately it is about photography, not cameras (hence DPR, not DCR). We most have a mobile with us always. As a keen photographer I would love to know which shape up best, which offer me the greatest potential, it will be a factor in my decision making. Gadget and Mobile review sites do not review them from a photographer's perspective, hence DPR's move is welcome and overdue.

And finally, remember, the whole 35mm format was derided when it started, not for proper photographers.

Respecting tradition is GOOD, & anyone who PURPOSELY leaves their SLR home to use a phone instead is being foolish. I have no interest in reading about what "those people" are doing "over there," mobile was spun off from this site for that very reason. Do you think SLR users care about what Coolpix shooters do? I don't. I can tell you that I would at least take a micro 4/3rds or Sony RX100 if I thought carrying an SLR was like backpacking for a week-long mule-back trek through the Grand Canyon.

(Dan Tong) nailed it. The tool isn't EVERYTHING, but it DOES matter. That prior article about the AP photographer who used an iPhone at the Olympics is the sort of foolishness I'm talking about. If someone commissioned me to photograph Michael-stinking Phelps's last hurrah in the pool, & I have prime real estate shooting position, you think I'm photographing that with a stinking phone? Give me a Nikon D3s or D4 & good glass. Only a FOOL would shoot something like that with a PHONE.

I bet you haven't taken up my offer to look at the fantastic photos taken by Dean Holland with the iPhone 4S. He left his pro gear at home because he was on a short but sentimental trip with his wife, who would have been very unimpressed by his lugging around big cameras and lenses. Exactly when a half decent phone camera can fill the gap.

The fact is, pictures taken by mobile phones are improving all the time, to the point where they are good enough to take great photos. Take a look at any collection of classic photos, and you will see some examples of poorer qualities in almost every aspect - more blur, less resolution, etc. Does that detract from the shots? One day, mobile phones will take better photos than many DSLR's of today. There'll still be a larrytusaz type spitting hatred at DUMB phones, because the DSLR's will also be that much better...

(gwales) He still could've used a Sony RX100 or Olympus E-PM1 kit and done better. That's what I did on a recent trip we took-- well, it was actually the Olympus E-PL1 (before I upgraded to the E-PM1). Regardless I STILL took my Nikon D5100 and used it too. The phone camera never saw the light of day, to have done so would've been most tacky.

Thanks goodness those articles are over on that side of the tracks where "those people" can be satisfied without goofing up the perfectly great thing we have going on here.

Nice work dpreview! Ignore the old fuddy duddies and they're naysaying - like you pointed out, they're usually wrong in the end. Mobile devices are going to generate 10x or 1000x more photos than the monster DSLR's ever will, and will probably be viewed more too...

I'm really glad my phone has a camera, and that cameras in phones are getting better. There have been a bunch of times where having a camera phone was really useful. There have been a handful of times when I've gotten really great pictures I never would have gotten otherwise. But I would never go out specifically to shoot pictures with my camera phone.

For my part, only having a camera phone has driven me to buy a real camera. At last, I can really photograph for photography's sake.

I have no problem with dpreview branching out like this, though. Mobile photography is clearly huge right now, and getting huger. Insert statistics about iPhone pictures dominating picture sharing sites. With luck, maybe some of the camera phone people will cross the bridge over to the main site and real photography. The more people in this particular hobby, the cheaper and better real cameras will get, and the more variety we'll get too.

In part it is not about whether they are sticking with one or the other.

If a mobile phone user gets an expensive camera, they will continue to use their phone camera, and having pro or prosumer gear may actually raise their standards for what they want their smartphone camera to be capable of.

By the same token, people who start with dedicated cameras and already care about photography are very likely to have higher standards for the camera in their smartphone, which will inevitably get used.

It's a website that is aimed at mobile photography and yet the layout is not responsive?

The layout is the same regardless of device it is being viewed on. This may have been a purposeful decision and if so then fair enough, but I would have imagined that the site would have been written to render in a more readable fashion on a mobile phone.

Currently. Historically. But I thought this was a forward looking project? I think the idea is great, but to jump in with a website which looks 5 years old and is tuned for consumption on a desktop? When you are chasing the new mobile-connected generation. Just being picky. I'm sure it is easier to criticise that to do.

I seriously hope your custom mobile version of the site is not making any assumptions regarding the screen resolution of the mobile device it is being displayed on because there are many devices out there with many difference screen resolutions.

Actually, having a distinct mobile view of the site is not the way forward. Having one site that can respond to whatever device it is rendered on is the way forward. Granted it would take a bit longer to create that a simple desktop version of the site but the benefits would be enormous and pay for themselves in no time at all.

Think Mobile First, Progressive Enhancement and Responsive Design :)

Your current level of mobile traffic will never change if you don't cater for mobile devices properly. Given the number of mobile phones out there I would hope that you are looking to increase your mobile traffic.

My posts disappear :-)I posted 40 minutes ago: "Why is everything so black and white ? There are many shades of gray. When I shoot "serious" I only use manual focus with prime lenses..." It is no longer here. The beginning of the post is still in my profile, but when clicking onto the link I see the error message: "Oops! Google Chrome could not find {sitedomain} Suggestions: Search on Google:"

I am very sorry, but I can not reproduce your statement that it is still there. This is what I did:1) Entered "Why is everything so black and white" as search in my Browser. I only get one hit, this one, not my original post. ( I repeated on all pages of: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/10/09/Announcing-connect-dpreview2) I turned on my picture in profile to easier identify my posts and visually found every single post of mine. The one in question is not there

-> a) Please take this serious. If you can still find my post, be so kind to post a link in here so I can reproduce it is still there indeed

-> b) And still, why would some post then appear in the result list of searches in my browser and others would not. That is still a bug.

-> c) Return the respect to your readers which they give to you. I spend the time to write enough detail for you to reproduce the bug. If you could find my posts, please spend the time to write me how you did. "It's still there" is not a sufficient.

could be because your post is hidden under a 'show remaining x replies' thing, so that it does not show in the browser until you click on the 'show remaining x replies' text at the foot of the relevant thread.

If you search for:"Photographers may be able to make a halfway respectable", then your's is the following post, revealed when you click on "show remaining x replies".

Dear wetsleet,Thank you! That was it. Confirmed, post still there, although hard to find.

Dear dpreview: 1) Is it possible that search still finds posts, even if they are hidden at the time of search?2) Is there a way so I can see in one spot all links to all my posts which have a reply ?

A compliment about reliability of posting:I am posting from china where my connection is interrupted frequently. If after posting my browser does not show the post, it was not posted. If it does show the post, it was posted. This seems to be trivial, but e.g. in facebook posts are always shown after posting, even if they never made it. Thus kudos to you for programming a better posting system than facebook. It is a tiny feature, but important to users who must use unreliable internet services! Thanks so much!

For some, the twain shall never meet : Connect should be a good thing - neither group has to try to filter out the other.

For some, both are exciting and interesting : membership of both sites allows you to track conversations in both forums. As compromises go, not bad.

Some will progress from one to the other - getting the bug by accident from a ubiquitous device - and they'll already feel at home.

Some of us take the best of both. I rarely take pictures with a phone - and I'm usually disappointed. I don't expect that to change until the laws of physics do. But I use my phone as a relay for EyeFi and the WiFi add-on for my D4. I have tablets that are used for editing. posting and galleries/display books - and as a remote for the D4.

"mobile photographers take worthless snaps"? Really? So a snapshot of my child at a spontaneous moment in time is "worthless" because all I have with me is an iPhone instead of a D4? C'mon - that's a bit pompous IMHO.

It just occured to me that, while there is so much hullaballoo about phones having cameras and how pictures out of those aren't photography etcetera, no manufacturer yet has arrived at the idea to add a phone to their camera...For people which prefer cameras to phones, such a thing would be welcomed, I'm sure. I see no technical problems with it, even in supercompacts (exceptin', it's bound to ring just when you're about to click...)No, really. Add a full-fledged GPS, and there it is: a veritable Tricorder. ;)

If you want a phone in a camera, I assume it is because you want to share pictures over the net. I doubt you would like to run around with a D4 and a 300 mm lens hold it up to your ear for an hour ( or you are a good body builder ). So if sharing your pictures is your target, all you need to do is to have a camera that has Wifi, or to add the SD card which have Wifi build in. Then set your mobile phone to offer a Wifi hotspot and voila, you can share your images on the internet from your camera. No cables. Another benefit is that you only need one mobile contract instead of two, which saves money and paper work. I hope this makes sense and explains why cameras have no mobile phones build in.

No, the least I'd need is the ability to upload out-of-camera. First, it generates unnecessary costs, and second, the pictures need proper attention before one posts them up. What I tried to suggest is, if the camera had a phone, it would mean one device less to carry. I still use my phone 99% for voice or SMS, and for net access I prefer properly sized screen.WiFi card, that's nice when you want to connect to your laptop and unload from the camera, perhaps in a background process. But I suspect these will have problems working out of all-metal clad cameras... so I'm still happy with the USB cable.

For reasons that holding a DSLR camera to your head to make a long phone call is impractical, you would need a regular phone anyways to carry with you and your camera. Once you have the camera with you anyways, having a second mobile in your camera would double your carrier cost, thus using wifi and utilize one carrier contract only would be lower cost. Your mobile runs an open OS, such as iOS or Android and thus you can choose apps to edit and upload. On DSLRs the OS are custom and you can not. When reading your wish I only see disadvantages using mobile in camera versus using a separate mobile. Especially if I would do editing in camera I would prefer a lighter phone / tablet in holding. Possibly one with a bigger screen than the camera so that I have an additional review process during shooting on location.

It's not so much of a problem, one can always use Bluetooth-connected earphone.But you're right. Long talks with telephoto lenses could be impractical. My original question was exploring the phone - camera device having their primary function roles reversed. And two kinds of software, of course - only using some common hardware, and not necessarily at the same time. Photo memory card and SIM extra.Today, when you have all those "programmed" "modes" (sic!) even with different settings for Cats and Dogs (still no Parrots), I kinda expect to see every possible combination - regardless of what comon sense whispers... or yells... ;)Cheers!

Mobile phone photography is clearly here to stay, and the technical quality of these devices is bound to improve rapidly (as, indeed, it has been doing over recent years).

I believe that the compact point-and-shoot camera will rapidly become obsolete, as the quality of mobile phone cameras improves. That quality will be a serious differentiator, your reviews will help us choose which devices to go for.

Further, the forums will be of great benefit, and I do hope that there will be a lot of reviews of photography-related apps.

I think dpreview would be stupid to ignore the trend in casual photography and not go after this segment with their particular knowledgeable style. Better to keep those photographers in the same family of websites, to encourage crossovers in the community. Hopefully Connect is popular, people on Connect get curious about the original dpreview site, get interested in "real" photography, and come join us here on this site. Could be a great influx of new talent and content.

Ooooooooh, blue on white. Looks swish dudes, having just acquired a smartphone mahself I may even be participating in the fun and games more heavily.From a content point of view, would it be correct to assume that dpreview will still be talking about smartphones and the like on the front page, but that any articles will be a link to connect?

If it means I won't have to read about iPhone photography (an oxymoron if I ever heard one) so often now, I am all for it.

I have to respectfully disagree about it being wrong that serious photographers are separate from "snapshooters." Of course they are. It has always been that way, and the existence of smartphone cameras doesn't change this. The only difference is that 20-30 odd years ago the snapshooters used a Polaroid SX-70 or Kodak Instamatic, while the enthusiasts & professionals used 35mm SLRs or medium format. Now, it's smartphone cameras and/or point & shoots, and DSLRs or mirrorless (or medium format).

And in both cases, the serious users make attempts to learn things about lighting, composition, taking control with f-stops and white balance etc--whereas the snapshooter has no interest in learning the f-stop/white balance stuff & just points/clicks without much, if any, regard to lighting (maybe composition a LITTLE). They ARE separate worlds & should be treated as such.

Whenever I read that kind of argument I am reminded of Bert Hardy and his Box Brownie...http://www.photographersgallery.com/photo.asp?id=622

"Hardy produced the most famous image of his entire career on the cheapest Box Brownie. Bert had made his point. "http://www.photohistories.com/Photo-Histories/50/the-life-and-times-of-albert-hardy-1913-1995?pg=all

@wetsleetThe tool doesn't make the master. Larry is right, and you agree with him actually.A snapshooter will switch his SLR to auto to match his smartphone experience. A master will use whatever he has with him to its max potential.

There may be a difference between serious photographers and snapshooters, but I do believe that serious photographers can produce attractive pictures using fairly basic tools. If these tools can be reviewed and discussed by people who understand photography, I am sure that we will all benefit.

I can tell the difference in image quality between pics taken on a 5D with L glass and a cameraphone - of course I can - but I don't carry three or four kilos of camera around with me all the time. I do carry a phone.

Learning about the relative image quality of various phones will undoubtedly help shape my choice next time it comes around to phone renewal time.

Photographers may be able to make a halfway respectable image with a phone, but why would you deliberately dumb yourself down that way? "I don't always have my DSLR with me?" Me either, but I do have my Olympus E-PM1 with me. I would rather be thrown in a pool full of piranhas than to DARE use a PHONE for anything other than a goofy shot of me doing the "rabbit ears" to my buddy. I'm delighted these articles about the snapshooters & their phones will be over there vs in here so much. Dpreview can have the other staff to placate the soccer moms & hipsters and leave Dpreview itself free of that silliness.

Why is everything so black and white ? There are many shades of gray. When I shoot "serious" I only use manual focus with prime lenses. I hope this qualifies me to belong into the serious camp. But I only lug my "pro" kit around when I am on a dedicated shooting trip, which is now once a week. I have my phone with me all the time and have sometimes odd minutes to kill. Even the quality is of course not as good, shallow depth of field is non existent, and yet I wonder if I can then use my phone and simply practice. E.g. framing and composition. So when I do get out with my pro gear, I am more fit. And strangely enough, even though I am a photographer, I have a mother. From which I live far away ( 6000 miles ). She would be so delighted if everyday I publish a few "silly" shots of her grandson or what we do. She does not care the quality, she cares I do it often. So now I am learning what hipstamatic is about. So in this case the mobile gets the photo job done, the pro kit not.

I'm sorry, but I do not like this decision. I'd like to see 1 site grow. Splitting off content and readers does not contribute to people opening up to new ideas in my view.

It's like having separate DPREVIEW sites for Canon and Nikon to me. Even though I am a Canon owner, I'm not a Nikon killer type of Canon owner. I appreciate to see articles and reviews of other brands and meet their users.

Personally I would have added this new connected/mobile group to this site. The forums that you run is already a good way for people with a similar mindset to connect. That way people from the old world get cross-fertilized to the new wold and visa versa.

Could it be you lack the man power to cover the connected/mobile world in the same depth as on DPREVIEW? And you felt you *had* to do something? And to not get different quality of reviews on DPREVIEW, you set up a new site so you could tick the "we too" box.

I'd love DPREVIEW style reviews for the iPhone and the Samsung Galaxy cameras.

"Splitting off content and readers does not contribute to people opening up to new ideas in my view." Maybe some of us don't WANT to open up to certain new ideas.

It has nothing to do with being a "fuddy duddy." It has to do with realizing that, yes, smartphones have gotten better, but "good enough for a snapshot" is not the same as measuring up to what a mirrorless or DSLR can do, and they don't. The users of such devices aren't photographers (or they're photographers who are being "casual" for a minute).

The typical smartphone snapshooter isn't interested in learning technical things & composition at the same level as an enthusiast, and a smartphone isn't up to the level promised by mirrorless or DSLRs. Snapshooters are like the parent who wants good food quickly using pre-bagged dinners vs spending all day in the kitchen making it from scratch. Sure smartphones are good enough for a snapshot, but since when is that the limit of our aspirations, for a snapshot to be "good enough."

some interesting theories there. Out of interest, before writing this "I'd love DPREVIEW style reviews for the iPhone and the Samsung Galaxy cameras." did you look at this 10 page review? http://connect.dpreview.com/post/1343713337/apple-iphone-5-review

I stand corrected on the wild hypothesis! That is an impressive review! Still I'm not sure if I like a separate site. For example, I would have wanted to compare the iPhone5 test results with other P&S cameras like I can do on DPReview.

Great that you are keeping abreast of the changing times, at least in your coverage. But my 1st impressions are that the site is a woeful step back in time!. It just looks like a regular website of 5-10 years ago, and designed to be viewed on a PC monitor. If popular photography habits are changing, it is only in the wake of changing internet habits - the people taking all these photos on mobile devices are doubtless accessing the web in a like manner.

So on my phone screen (and it is a Galaxy Note), everything is tiny, lots of zooming required. To select a story I need to accurately touch on the thumbnail (more like little baby fingernail) picture, etc, etc.

The whole layout is pure Cartesian from yesteryear.

To make this work a lot more thought needs to go into the presentation and accessibility. And a fantastic and intuitive search facility is needed so that content can be found, despite not having the luxury of just spreading it all out to view on a 26" monitor.

wow 10 years ago? That's harsh. Most of the sites we use today didn't even exist 10 years ago... We will certainly be putting more resource into site design (and search is coming next week) - most importantly we'll be adding a phone optimised version next. This is day one :-)